BAR EXAMINATION Q & A 2008
CIVIL LAW At age 18, Marian found out that she was
I unborn child as her sole beneficiary. When she
Ana Rivera had a husband, a Filipino citizen like
her, who was among the passengers on board a
commercial jet plane which crashed in the Atlantic
Ocean ten (10) years earlier and had never been
heard of ever since. Believing that her husband
had died, Ana married Adolf Cruz Staedtler, a
divorced German national born of a German
father and a Filipino mother residing in Stuttgart.
To avoid being reqiured to submit the required
certificate of capacity to marry from the German
Embassy in Manila, Adolf stated in the application
for marriage license that he was a Filipino citizen.
With the marriage license stating that Adolf was a
Filipino, the couple got married in a ceremony
officiated by the Parish Priest of Calamba, Laguna
in a beach in Nasugbu, Batangas, as the local
parish priest refused to solemnize marriages
except in his church. Is the marriage valid?
Explain fully. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The marriage is not valid. Art. 41 FC allows
the present spouse to contract a subsequent
marriage during the subsistence of his previous
marriage provided that: (a) his prior spouse in the
first marriage had been absent for four
consecutive years; (b) that the spouse present
has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse
was already dead, and (C) present spouse
instituted a summary proceeding for the
declaration of the presumptive death of absent
spouse. Otherwise, the second marriage shall be
null and void. In the instant case, the husband of
Ana was among the passengers on board a
commercial jet plane which crashed in the Atlantic
Ocean. The body of the deceased husband was
not recovered to confirm his death. Thus, following
Art. 41, Ana should have first secured a judicial
declaration of his presumptive death before she
married Adolf. The absence of the said judicial
declaration incapacitated Ana from contracting
her second marriage, making it void ab initio.
II
pregnant. She insured her own life and named her
was already due to give birth, she and her
boyfriend Pietro, the father of her unboarn child,
were kidnapped in a resort in Bataan where they
were vacationing. The military gave chase and
after one week, they were found in an abandoned
hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with
bolos. Marian and the baby delivered were both
found dead, with the baby's umbilical cord already
cut. Pietro survived.
a. Can Marian's baby be the beneficiary of
the insurance taken on the life of the
mother? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of the life
insurance of Marian. Art. 40 NCC provides that
"birth determines personality; but the conceived
child shall be considered born for all purposes that
are favorable to it, provided that it be born later
with the conditions specified in Art. 41. Article 41
states that "for civil purposes, the fetus shall be
considered born if it is alive at the time it is
completely delivered from the mother's womb.
However, if the fetus had an intra-uterine life of
less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it
dies within twenty-four (24) hours after its
complete delivery from the maternal womb. The
act of naming the unborn child as sole beneficiary
in the insurance is favorable to the conceived child
and therefore the fetus acquires presumptive or
provisional personality. However, said
presumptive personality only becomes conclusive
if the child is born alive. The child need not survive
for twenty-four (24) hours as required under Art.
41 of the Code because "Marian was already due
to give birth," indicating that the child was more
than seven months old.
b. Between Marian and the baby, who is
presumed to have died ahead? (1%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Marian is presumed to have died ahead of the
baby. Art. 43 applies to persons who are called to
succeed each other. The proof of death must be
established by positive or circumstantial evidence
derived from facts. It can never be established
from mere inference. In the present case, it is very
clear that only Marian and Pietro were hacked with
bolos. There was no showing that the baby was
also hacked to death. The baby's death could
have been due to lack of nutrition.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
The baby is presumed to have died ahead of
Marian. Under Par. 5, rule 131, Sec. 5 (KK) of the
Rules of Court, if one is under 15 or above 60 and
the age of the other is in between 15 and 60, the
latter is presumed to have survived. In the instant
case, Marian was already 18 when she found out
that she was pregnant. She could be of the same
age or maybe 19 years of age when she gave
birth.
c. Will Pietro, as surviving biological father of
the baby, be entitled to claim the proceeds
of the life insurance on the life of Marian?
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Pietro, as the biological father of the baby, shall
be entitled to claim the proceeds of life insurance SUGGESTED ANSWER:
of the Marian because he is a compulsory heir of
his child.
III
Roderick and Faye were high school sweethearts.
When Roderick was 18 and Faye, 16 years old,
they started to live together as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage. When Faye
reached 18 years of age, her parents forcibly took
her back and arranged for her marriage to Brad.
Although Faye lived with Brad after the marriage,
Roderick continued to regularly visit Faye while
Brad was away at work. During their marriage,
Faye gave birth to a baby girl, Laica. When Faye
was 25 years old, Brad discovered her continued
liason with Roderick and in one of their heated
arguments, Faye shot Brad to death. She lost no
time in marrying her true love Roderick, without a
marriage license, claiming that they have been
continuosly cohabiting for more than 5 years.
a. Was the marriage of Roderick and Faye
valid? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The marriage of Roderick and Faye is not
valid. Art. 4, FC provides that the absence of any
of the essential or formal requisites renders the
marriage void ab initio. However, no license shall
be necessary for the marriage of a man and a
woman who have lived together as husband and
wife for at least 5 years and without any legal
impediment to marry each other. In Republic v.
Dayot, G.R. No. 175581, 28 March 2008,
reiterating the doctrine in Niñal v. Bayadog, G.R.
No. 133778, 14 March 2000, this fiveyear period
is characterized by exclusivity and continuity. In
the present case, the marriage of Roderick and
Faye cannot be considered as a marriage of
exceptional character, because there were 2 legal
impediments during their cohabitation: minority on
the part of Faye, during the first two years of
cohabitation; and, lack of legal capacity, since
Faye married Brad at the age of 18. The absence
of a marriage license made the marriage of Faye
and Roderick void ab initio.
b. What is the filiation status of Laica? (2%)
Laica is legitimate because children conceived or
born during the marriage of the parents are
presumed to be legitimate (Art. 164, FC).
c. Can Laica bring an action to impugn her
own status on the ground that based on
DNA results, Roderick is her biological
father? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. Laica cannot bring an action to impugn her
own status. In Liyao Jr. v. Tanhoti-Liyao, G.R. No.
138961, 07 March 2002, the Supreme Court ruled
that impugning the legitimacy of the child is a
strictly personal right of husband, except: (a) when
the husband died before the expiration of the
period fixed for bringing the action; (b) if he should
die after the filing of the complaint, without having
desisted therefrom, or (c) if the child was born
after the death of the husband. Laica's case does b. Instead of a judicial action, can
not fall under any of the exceptions. administrative proceedings be brought for
the purpose of making the above
d. Can Laica be legitimated by the marriage corrections? (2%)
of her biological parents? (1%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. An administrative proceeding cannot be
No. Laica cannot be legitimated by the marriage brought for the purpose of making the above
of her biological parents because only children corrections. R.A. 9048, otherwise known as
conceived and born outside of wedlock of parents the Clerical Error Act, which authorizes the
who at the time of the conception of the former city or municipal civil registrar or the consul
were not disqualified by any impediment to marry general to correct a clerical or typographical
each other may be legitimated (Art. 177, FC). error in an entry and/or change the first name
or nickname in the civil register without need
IV of a judicial order. Errors that involve the
change of nationality, age, status, surname or
sex of petitioner are not included from the
Gianna was born to Andy and Aimee, who at the
coverage of the said Act (Silverio v. Republic,
time Gianna's birth were not married to each
G.R. No. 174689, 22 Oct., 2007).
other. While Andy was single at the time, Aimee
was still in the process of securing a judicial
declaration of nullity on her marriage to her ex- c. Assuming that Aimee is successful in
husband. Gianna's birth certificate, which was declaring her former marriage void, and
signed by both Andy and Aimee, registered the Andy and Aimee subsequently married
status of Gianna as "legitimate", her surname each other, would Gianna be legitimated?
carrying that of Andy's and that her parents were (1%)
married to each other.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. Can a judicial action for correction of
Gianna cannot be legitimated by the subsequent
entries in Gianna's birth certificate be
successfully maintained to: marriage of Andy and Aimee. Art. 177 of the FC
i. Change her statusprovides that "only children conceived and born
from
outside of wedlock of parents who, at the time of
"legitimate" to "illegitimate" (1%);
the conception of the former, were not disqualified
and by any impediment to marry each other may be
legitimated." In the present case, a legal
impediment was existing at the time of the
ii. Change her surname from that of
conception of Gianna. Her mother, Aimee, was
Andy's to Aimee's maiden
still alive in the process of securing judicial
surname? (1%)
declaration of nullity on her marriage to her ex-
husband.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
V
Yes, a judicial action for correction of entries in
Gianna's birth certificate can be successfully
Despite several relationships with different
maintained to change (a) her status from
women, Andrew remained unmarried. His first
"legitimate" to "illegitimate," and (b) her surname
relationship with Brenda produced a daughter,
from that of Andy's to Aimee's maiden surname in
Amy, now 30 years old. His second, with Carla,
accordance with Rule 108 of the Rules of Court
produced two sons: Jon and Ryan. His third, with
because said changes are substantive
Donna, bore him no children although Elena has
corrections.
a daughter Jane, from a previous relationship. His
last, with Fe, produced no biological children but
they informally adopted without court c. Can Amy, Jon, Ryan, Vina, Wilma, and
proceedings, Sandy's now 13 years old, whom Sandy legally claim support from each
they consider as their own. Sandy was orphaned other? (2%)
as a baby and was entrusted to them by the
midwife who attended to Sandy's birth. All the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
children, including Amy, now live with andrew in
his house. Amy, Jon, Ryan, Vina, Wilma and Sandy
cannot legally claim support from each other
a. Is there any legal obstacle to the legal because Art. 195, par 5 limits the giving of
adoption of Amy by Andrew? To the legal support to "legitimate brothers and sisters,
adoption of Sandy by Andrew and Elena? whether full or half blood."
(2%)
d. Can Jon and Jane legally marry? (1%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. Jon and Jane can marry each other; Jon
Yes, there is a legal obstacle to the legal adoption is an illegitimate child of Andrew while Jane is
of Amy by Andrew. Under Sec. 9(d) of RA 8552, a child of Elena from a previous relationship.
the New Domestic Adoption Act of 1998, the Thus, their marriage is not one of the
written consent of the illegitimate sons/daughters, prohibited marriages enumerated under Art.
ten (10) years of age or over, of the adopter, if 38 of the FC.
living with said adopter and the latter's spouse, if
any, is necessary to the adoption. All the children VI
of Andrew are living with him. Andrew needs to get
the written consent of Jon, Ryan, Vina and Wilma,
Alex died without a will, leaving only an
who are all ten (10) years old or more. Sandy's
undeveloped and untitled lot in Tagiug City. He is
consent to Amy's adoption is not necessary
survived by his wife and 4 children. His wife told
because she was not legally adopted by Andrew.
the children that she is waiving her share in the
Jane's consent is likewise not necessary because
property, and allowed Bobby, the eldest son who
she is not a child of Andrew. Sandy, an orphan
was about to get married, to construct his house
since birth, is eligible for adoption under Sec. 8(f)
on ¼ of the lot, without however obtaining the
of RA 8552, provided that Andrew obtains the
consent of his siblings. After settlement of Alex's
written consent of the other children mentioned
estate and partition among the heirs, it was
above, including Amy and Elena obtains the
discovered that Bobby's house was constructed
written consent of Jane, if she is over ten years old
on the portion allocated to his sister, Cathy asked
(Sec. 9(d), RA 8552).
Bobby to demolish his house and vacate the
portion alloted to her. In leiu of demolition, Bobby
b. In his old age, can Andrew be legally offered to purchase from Cathy the lot portion on
entitled to claim support from Amy, Jon, which his house was constructed. At that time, the
Ryan, Vina, Wilma, and Sandy assuming house constructed was valued at P350.000.
that all of them have the means to support
him? (1%)
a. Can Cathy lawfully ask for demolition of
Bobby's house? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Andrew, in his old age, cannot be legally entitled
to claim support because Art. 195, par 2 of the FC
Yes, Cathy can lawfully ask for the demolition of
limits the giving of support to "legitimate
Bobby's house. Where there are two or more
ascendants and descendants." (C). Can Amy,
heirs, the whole estate of the decedent, is, before
Jon, Ryan, Vina, Wilma, and Sandy legally claim
partition, owned in common by such heirs, subject
support from each other? (2%)
to the payment of debts of the deceased (Art.
1078, Civil Code), Under the rules on co-
ownership, "none of the co-owners shall, without
the consent of the others make alterations in the
thing owned in common, even though benefits for
all would results therefrom." In Cruz v. Catapang,
G.R. No. 164110, 12 Feb., 2008, the Court held
that "alterations include any act of strict dominion
or ownership such as construction of a house." In
the present case, of Alex is the real owner of the
undeveloped and untitled lot in Taguig, co-
ownership is created among his wife and four
children over said property upon his death. Since
the construction of the house by Bobby was done
without obtaining the consent of his siblings, the
alteration effected is illegal. Bobby is considered
to be in bad faith and as a sanction for his conduct,
he can be compelled by Cathy to demolish or
remove the structure at his own expense.
If Carlo is able to legally recover his property, he
cannot require Anthony to account for all the fruits
b. Can Bobby legally insist on purchasing the harvested from the property. Anthony is entitled to
land? (2%) the fruits harvested in good faith before his
possession was legally interrupted (Art. 544, Civil
SUGGESTED ANSWER: Code).
No. Bobby cannot legally insist on purchasing the
land. Being in bad faith, he has no option to pay
for the price of the lot (Art. 450, Civil Code).
VII
Anthony bought a piece of untitled agricultural
land from Bert. Bert, in turn, acquired the property
by forging carlo's signature in a deed of sale over
the property. Carlo had been in possession of the
property for 8 years, declared it for tax purposes,
and religiously paid all taxes due on the property.
Anthony is not aware of the defect in Bert's title,
but has been in actual physical possession of the
property from the time he bought it from Bert, who
had never been in possession of the property for
one year.
a. Can Anthony acquire ownership of the
property by acquisitive prescription? How
many more years does he have possess it
to acquire ownership? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Anthony can acquire ownership of the
property through acquisitive prescription. In the
present case, Anthony is a buyer/possessor in
good faith because he was not aware of the defect
in Bert's title (Art. 526, Civil Code). As such,
Anthony can acquire ownership and other real
rights over immovable property through open,
continuous possession of 10 years (Art. 1134,
Civil Code). Anthony needs nine (9) more years of
possession, in addition to his one (1) year of
possession in good faith.
b. If Carlo is able to legally recover his
property, can he require Anthony to
account for all the fruits he has harvested
from the property while in possession?
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c. If there are standing crops on the property
when Carlo recovers possession, can
Carlo appropriate them? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Carlos can appropriate only a portion of the
standing crops on the property once he recovers
possession. Anthony being a possessor in good
faith, shall have a right to a part of the expenses
of cultivation, and to a part of the net harvest of
the standing crops, both in proportion to the time
of the possession (Art 545, Civil Code).
VIII
Adam, a building contractor, was engaged by Blas
to construct a house on a lot which he (Blas) owns.
While digging on the lot in order to lay down the
foudation of the house, Adam hit a very hard
object. It turned out to be the vault of the old Banco
de las Islas Filipinas. Using a detonation device,
Adam was able to open the vault containing old
notes and coins which were in circulation during
the Spanish era. While the notes and coins are no
longer legal tender, they were valued at P100
million because of their historical value and the
coins silver nickel content. The following filed legal
claims over the notes and coins:
 i. Adam, as finder;
ii. Blas, as owner of the property where
they were found;
iii. Bank of the Philippine Islands, as
successor-in-interest of the owner of
the vault; and
iv. The Philippine Government because
of their historical value.
a. Who owns the notes and coins? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The notes and coins are no longer owned by the
Bank of the Philippine Islands, which has either
lost or abandoned the vault and its contents, and
it has not taken any effort to search, locate or
recover the vault. In any case, since the vault is in
actual possession of Adam, BPI may attempt, in a
judicial action to recover, to rebut the presumption
of ownership in favor of Adam and Blas (Art. 433,
Civil Code). Hidden treasure is any hidden and
unknown deposit of money, jewelry, or other
precious objects, the lawful ownership of which
does not appear. Given the age and importance
of the items found, it would be safe to consider the
vault, notes and coins abandoned by BPI and its
predecessor (Art. 439, Civil Code). It belongs to
the owner of the land on which it is found. When
the discovery is made on the property of another,
or of the State and by chance, one-half of it shall
belong to the finder who is not a trespasser (Art.
438, Civil Code). In the present case, Adam, as
finder, and Blas, as owner of the land, are entitled
to share 50-50 in the treasure. The government
can only claim if it can establish that the notes and
coins are of interest to science or the arts, then it
must pay just price of the things found, to be
divided equally between Adam and Blas (Art. 438,
Civil Code).
b. Assuming that either or both Adam and
Blas are adjudged as owners, will the
notes and coins be deemed part of their
absolute community or conjugal
partnership of gains with their respective
spouses? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
If either or both Adam and Blas are adjudged as
owners, the notes and coins shall be deemed part
of their absolute community or conjugal
partnership of gains with their respective spouses
(Art. 117, par 4, FC).
IX
The properties of Jessica and Jenny, who are
neighbors, lie along the banks of the Marikina
River. At certain times of the year, the river would
swell and as the water recedes, soil, rocks and
other materials are deposited on Jessica's and
Jenny's properties. This pattern of the river
swelling, receding and depositing soil and other
materials being deposited on the neighbors'
properties have gone on for many years. Knowing
his pattern, Jessica constructed a concrete barrier
about 2 meters from her property line and
extending towards the river, so that when the
water recedes, soil and other materials are
trapped within this barrier. After several years, the
area between Jessica's property line to the
concrete barrier was completely filled with soil,
effectively increasing Jessica's property by 2
meters. Jenny's property, where no barrier was
constructed, also increased by one meter along
the side of the river.
a. Can Jessica and Jenny legally claim
ownership over the additional 2 meters
and one meter, respectively, of land
deposited along their properties?(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Only Jenny can claim ownership over the
additional one meter of land deposited along her
property. Art. 457 of the Civil Code provides that
"to the owners of lands adjoining the banks of river
belong the accretion which they gradually receive
from the effects of the current of the water." Where
the land is not formed solely by the natural effect
of the water current of the river bordering land but
is also the consequences of the direct and
deliberate intervention of man, it is man-made
accretion and a part of the public domain (Tiongco
v. Director of Lands, 16 C.A. Rep 211, cited in
Nazareno v. C.A., G.R. No. 98045, 26 June 1996).
Thus, Jessica cannot legally claim ownership of
the additional 2 meters of land along her property
because she constructed a concrete barrier about
2 meters from her property causing deposits of
soil and other materials when the water recedes.
In other words, the increase in her property was page 1, which Arthur and his instrumental witness,
not caused by nature but was manmade. signed at the bottom. Page 2 contained the
attestation clause and the signatures, at the
b. If Jessica's and Jenny's properties are bottom thereof, of the 3 instrumental witnesses
registered, will the benefit of such which included Lambert, the driver of Arthur; Yoly,
registration extend to the increased area the family cook, and Attorney Zorba, the lawyer
of their properties? (2%) who prepared the will. There was a 3rd page, but
this only contained the notarial acknowledgement.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: The attestation clause stated the will was signed
on the same occasion by Arthur and his
instrumental witnesses who all signed in the
If the properties of Jessica and Jenny are
presence of each other, and the notary public who
registered, the benefit of such registration does
notarized the will. There are no marginal
not extend to the increased area of their
signatures or pagination appearing on any of the
properties. Accretion does not automatically
3 pages. Upon his death, it was discovered that
become registered land because there is a
apart from the house and lot, he had a P 1 million
specific technical description of the lot in its
account deposited with ABC bank.
Torrens title. There must be a separate application
for registration of the alluvial deposits under the
Torrens System (Grande v. CA, G.R. No. L- a. Was Erica preterited? (1%)
17652, 30 June, 1962).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c. Assume the two properties are on a cliff
adjoining the shore of Laguna Lake. Erica cannot be preterited. Art. 854 of the Civil
Jessica and Jenny had a hotel built on the Code provides that only compulsory heirs in the
properties. They had the erath and rocks direct line can be preterited.
excavated from the properties dumped on
the adjoining shore, giving rise to a new b. What other defects of the will, if any, can
patch of dry land. Can they validly lay cause denial of probate? (2%)
claim to the patch of land? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The other defects of the will that can cause its
No. Jessica and Jenny cannot validly lay claim to denial are as follows: (a) Atty. Zorba, the one who
the patch of land because in order to acquire land prepared the will was one of the three witnesses,
by accretion, there should be a natural and actual violating the three-witnesses rule; (b) no marginal
continuity of the accretion to the land of the signature at the last page; (c ) the attestation did
riparian owner caused by natural ebb and flow of not state the number of pages upon which the will
the current of the river (Delgado v. Samonte, CA- is written; and, (d) no pagination appearing
G.R. No. 34979- R, 10 Aug 1966). correlatively in letters on the upper part of the
three pages (Azuela v. C.A., G.R. No. 122880, 12
X Apr 2006 and cited cases therein, Art 805 and
806, Civil Code).
Arthur executed a will which contained only: (i) a
provision disinheriting his daughter Bernica for c. Was the disinheritance valid? (1%)
running off with a married man, and (ii) a provision
disposing of his share in the family house and lot SUGGESTED ANSWER:
in favor of his other children Connie and Dora. He
did not make any provisions in favor of his wife Yes, the disinheritance was valid. Art. 919, par 7,
Erica, because as the will stated, she would Civil Code provides that "when a child or
anyway get ½ of the house and lot as her conjugal descendant leads a dishonorable or disgraceful
share. The will was very brief and straightforward life, like running off with a married man, there is
and both the above provisions were contained in sufficient cause for disinheritance."
 d. How should the house and lot, and the institution of Peter and Paul as heirs (Art. 854,
cash be distributed? (1%) Civil Code); and, (b) the disposition that Peter and
Paul could not dispose of nor divide the London
SUGGESTED ANSWER: estate for more than 20 years is void (Art. 870,
Civil Code).
Since the probate of the will cannot be allowed,
the rules on intestate succession apply. Under Art. c. Is the testamentary prohibition against the
996 of the Civil Code, if a widow or widower and division of the London estate valid? (2%)
legitimate children or descendants are left, the
surviving spouse has the same share as of the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
children. Thus, ownership over the house and lot
will be created among wife Erica and her children No. the testamentary prohibition against the
Bernice, Connie and Dora. Similarly, the amount division of the London estate is void (Art. 870, Civil
of P 1 million will be equally divided among them. Code). A testator, however, may prohibit partition
for a period which shall not exceed twenty (20)
XI years (Art. 870 in relation to Art. 494, par 3, Civil
Code).
John and Paula, British citizens at birth, acquired
Philippine citizenship by naturalization after their XII
marriage. During their marriage the couple
acquired substanial landholdings in London and in Ernesto, an overseas Filipino worker, was coming
Makati. Paula bore John three children, Peter, home to the Philippines after working for so many
Paul and Mary. In one of their trips to London, the years in the Middle East. He had saved P100.000
couple executed a joint will appointing each other in his saving account in Manila which intended to
as their heirs and providing that upon the death of use to start a business in his home country. On his
the survivor between them the entire estate would flight home, Ernesto had a fatal heart attack. He
go to Peter and Paul only but the two could not left behind his widowed mother, his common-law
dispose of nor divide the London estate as long as wife and their twins sons. He left no will, no debts,
they live. John and Paul died tragically in the no other relatives and no other properties except
London Subway terrorist attack in 2005. Peter and the money in his saving account. Who are the
Paul filed a petition for probate of their parent's will heirs entitled to inherint from him and how much
before a Makati Regional Trial Court. should each receive?(3%)

a. Should the will be admitted to probate? SUGGESTED ANSWER:

(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. The will cannot be admitted to probate
because a joint will is expressly prohibited under
Art. 818 of the Civil Code. This provision applies
John and Paula became Filipino citizens after their
marriage.
b. Are the testamentary dispositions valid?
(2%)
The mother and twin sons are entitled to inherit
from Ernesto. Art. 991 of the Civil Code, provides
that if legitimate ascendants are left, the twin sons
shall divide the inheritance with them taking one-
half of the estate. Thus, the widowed mother gets
P50,000.00 while the twin sons shall receive
P25,000.00 each. The common-law wife cannot
inherit from him because when the law speaks
"widow or widower" as a compulsory heir, the law
refers to a legitimate spouse (Art. 887, par 3, Civil
Code).

SUGGESTED ANSWER: XIII

No. The testamentary dispositions are not valid Raymond, single, named his sister Ruffa in his will
because (a) omission of Mary, a legitimate child, as a devisee of a parcel of land which he owned.
is tantamount to preterition which shall annul the The will imposed upon Ruffa the obligation of
preseving the land and transferring it, upon her a. Make a will? (1%)
death, to her illegitimate daughter Scarlet who
was then only one year old. Raymond later died, SUGGESTED ANSWER:
leaving behind his widowed mother, Ruffa and
Scarlet. Assuming that he is of legal age (Art. 797, Civil
Code) and of sound mind at the time of execution
a. Is the condition imposed upon Ruffa, to of the will (Art. 798, Civil Code), Stevie, a blind
preserve the property and to transmit it person, can make a notarial will, subject to
upon her death to Scarlet, valid? (1%) compliance with the "two-reading rule" (Art. 808,
Civil Code) and the provisions of Arts. 804, 805
SUGGESTED ANSWER: and 806 of the Civil Code

Yes, the condition imposed upon Ruffa to b. Act as a witness to a will? (1%)
preserve the property and to transmit it upon her
death to Scarlet is valid because it is tantamount SUGGESTED ANSWER:
to fideicommissary substitution under Art. 863 of
the Civil Code. Stevie cannot be a witness to a will. Art. 820 of the
Civil Code provides that "any person of sound
b. If Scarlet predeceases Ruffa, who inherits mind and of the age of eighteen years or more,
the property? (2%) and not blind, deaf or dumb, and able to read and
write, may be a witness to the execution of a will.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
c. In either of the above instances, must the
Ruffa will inherit the property as Scarlet's heir. will be read to him? (1%)
Scarlet acquires a right to the succession from the
time of Raymond's death, even though she should SUGGESTED ANSWER:
predecease Ruffa (Art. 866, Civil Code).
If Stevie makes a will, the will must be read to him
c. If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, can twice, once by one of the subscribing witnesses,
Scarlet inherit the property directly from and again, by the notary public before whom the
Raymond? (2%) will is acknowledged (Art. 808, Civil Code).

SUGGESTED ANSWER: XV

If Ruffa predeceases Raymond, Raymond's Eduardo was granted a loan by XYZ Bank for the
widowed mother will be entitled to the inheritance.
purpose of improving a building which XYZ leased
Scarlet, an illegitimate child, cannot inherit thefrom him. Eduardo, executed the promissory note
property by intestate succession from Raymond ("PN") in favor of the bank, with his friend Recardo
who is a legitimate relative of Ruffa (Art. 992, Civil
as co-signatory. In the PN, they both
Code). Moreover, Scarlet is not a compulsory heir acknowledged that they are "individually and
of Raymond, hence she can inherit only by collectively" liable and waived the need for prior
testamentary succession. Since Raymond demand. To secure the PN, Recardo executed a
executed a will in the case at bar, Scarlet may real estate mortgageon his own property. When
inherit from Raymond. Eduardo defaulted on the PN, XYZ stopped
payment of rentals on the building on the ground
XIV that legal compensation had set in. Since there
was still a balance due on the PN after applying
Stevie was born blind. He went to school for the the rentals, XYZ foreclosed the real estate
blind, and learned to read in Baille Language. He mortgage over Recardo's property. Recardo
Speaks English fluently. Can he: opposed the foreclosure on the ground that he is
only a co-signatory; that no demand was made
upon him for payment, and assuming he is liable,
his liability should not go beyond half the balance
of the loan. Further, Recardo said that when the
bank invoked compensation between the reantals
and the amount of the loan, it amounted to a new
contract or novation, and had the effect of
extinguishing the security since he did not give his
consent (as owner of the property under the real
estate mortgage) therto.
a. Can XYZ Bank balidly assert legal
compensation? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, XYZ Bank can validly assert legal
compensation. In the present case, all of the
elements of legal compensation are present: (1)
XYZ Bank is the creditor of Eduardo while
Eduardo is the lessor of XYZ Bank; (2) both debts
consist in a sum of money, or if the things due are
consumable, they be of the same kind, and also
of the same quality if the latter has been stated;
(3) the two debts be due; (4) they be liquidated
and demandable, and (5) over neither of them
there be any retention or controversy,
commenced by third persons and communicated
in due time to the debtor (Art. 1279, Civil Code).
b. Can Recardo's property be foreclosed to
pay the full balance of the loan? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Recardo's property can be foreclosed to pay
the full balance of the loan because when he
signed as cosignatory in the promissory note, he
acknowledged he is solidarily liable with Eduardo.
In solidary obligations, a creditor has the right to
demand full payment of the obligation from any of
the solidary debtors (Art. 1207, Civil Code).
c. Does Recardo have basis under the Civil
Code for claiming that the original contract
was novated? (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No. Recardo has no basis for claiming novation of
the original contract when the bank invoked
compensation because there was simply partial
compensation (Art. 1290, Civil Code) and this
would not bar the bank from recovering the
remaining balance of the obligation.
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: No. In order that an
obligation may be extinguished by another, it is
imperative that it be so declared in unequivocal
terms, or that the old and new obligations be on
every point compatible with each other. Novation
is never presumed (Art. 1292, Civil Code).
XVI
Dux leased his house to Iris for a period of 2 years,
at the rate of P25,000.00 monthly, payable
annually in advance. The contract stipulated that
it may be renewed for another 2-year period upon
mutual agreement of the parties. The contract also
granted Iris the right of first refusal to purchase the
property at any time during the lease, if Dux
decides to sell the property at the same price that
the property is offered for sale to a third party.
Twenty-three months after execution of the lease
contract, Dux sold breach of her right of first
refusal. Dux said there was no breach because
the property was sold to his mother who is not a
third party. Iris filed an action to rescind the sale
and to compel Dux to sell the property to her at the
same price. Alternatively, she asked the court to
extend the lease for another 2 years on the same
terms.
a. Can Iris seek rescission of the sale of the
property to Dux's mother? (3%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, because the right of first refusal is included
in the contract signed by the parties. Only if the
lessee failed to exercise the right of first refusal
could the lessor lawfully sell the subject property
to others, under no less than the same terms and
conditions previously offered to the lessee.
Granting that the mother is not a third party, this
would make her privy to the agreement of Dux and
Iris, aware of the right of first refusal. This makes
the mother a buyer in bad faith, hence giving more
ground for rescission of the sale to her (Equatorial
Realty, et al. v. Mayfair Theater, G.R. No. 106063,
21 Nov. 1996). ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: No, Iris
cannot seek rescission of the sale of the property
to Dux’s mother because the sale is not one of
those rescissible contracts under Art. 1381 of the stale. He is now estopped from raising the issue
Civil Code. that a cashier's check is not legal tender.

b. Will the alternative prayer for extension of b. Can Felipe validly refuse to pay Gustavo
the lease prosper? (2%) again? (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED ANSWER:

No. The contract stipulated that it may be renewed Yes, Felipe can refuse to pay Gustavo, who
for another 2-year period upon mutual agreement allowed the check to become stale. Although a
of the parties. Contracts are binding between the check is not legal tender (Belisario v. Natividad.
parties; validity or compliance cannot be left to the 60 Phil 156), there are instances when a check
will of one of the parties (Art. 1308, Civil Code). produces the effects of payment, for example: (a)
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: It depends. The when the creditor is in estoppel or he had
alternative prayer for the extension of the lease previously promised he would accept a check
may prosper if (a) there is a stipulation in the (Paras, Civil Code Annotated, Vol IV, 2000 ed., p.
contract of sale; (b) Dux's mother is aware of the 394); (b) when the check has lost its value
existing contract of lease; or (c) the lease is because of the fault of the creditor (Art. 1249, 2nd
recorded in the Registry of Property (Art. 1676, par.),as when he was unreasonably delayed in
Civil Code). presenting the check for payment (PNB v. Seeto,
G.R. No, L-4388, 13 August 1952).
XVII
c. Can Felipe compel Gustavo to receive
Felipe borrowed $100 from Gustavo in 1998, US$100 instead? (1%)
when the Phil P - US$ exchange rate was P56 -
US$1. On March 1, 2008, Felipe tendered to SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Gustavo a cashier's check in the amount of
P4,135 in payment of his US$ 100 debt, based on Felipe cannot compel Gustavo to receive US$100
the Phil P - US$ exchange rat at that time. because under RA 529, payment of loans should
Gustavo accepted the check, but forgot to deposit be at Philippine currency at the rate of exchange
it until Sept. 12, 2008. His bank refused to prevailing at the time of the stipulated date of
accepted the check because it had become stale. payment. Felipe could only compel Gustavo to
Gustavo now wants Felipe to pay him in cash the receive US$ 100 if they stipulated that obligation
amount of P5,600. Claiming that the previous be paid in foreign currency (R.A. 4100).
payment was not in legal tender, and that there
has been extraordinary deflation since 1998, and XVIII
therefore, Felipe should pay him the value of the
debt at the time it was incurred. Felipe refused to
AB Corp. entered into a contract with XY Corp.
pay him again, claiming that Gustavo is estopped
whereby the former agreed to construct the
from raising the issue of legal tender, having
research and laboratory facilities of the latter.
accepted the check in March, and that it was
Under the terms of the contract, AB Corp. agreed
Gustavo's negligence in not depositing the check
to complete the facility in 18 months, at the total
immediately that caused the check to become
contract price of P10 million. XY Corp. paid 50%
stale.
of the total contract price, the balance to be paid
upon completion of the work. The work stated
a. Can Gustavo now raised the issue that the immediately, but AB Corp. later experienced work
cashier's check is not legal tender? (2%) slippage because of labor unrest in his company.
AB Corp.'s employees claimed that they are not
SUGGESTED ANSWER: being paid on time; hence, the work slowdown. As
of the 17th month, work was only 45% completed.
No. Gustavo previously accepted a check as AB Corp. asked for extension of time, claiming
payment. It was his fault why the check became that its labor problems is a case of fortuitous
event, but this was denied by XY Corp. When it gave her an advance payment to be used for
became certain that the contruction could not be purposes of realesing the mortgage on the
finished on time, XY Corp. sent written notice property. When the mortgage was released, Juliet
cancelling the contract, and requiring AB Corp. to executed a Deed of Absolute Sale over the
immediately vacate the premises. property which was duly registered with the
Registry of Deeds, and a new TCT was issued in
a. Can the labor unrest be considered a Dehlma's name. Dehlma immediately took
fortuitous event? (1%) possession over the house and lot and the
movables therein. Thereafter, Dehlma went to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: theAssessor's Office to get a new tax declaration
under her name. She was surprised to find out that
the property was already declared for tax
No. The labor unrest cannot be considered a
purposes in the name of XYZ Bank which had
fortuitous event under Art. 1174 of the Civil Code.
foreclosed the mortgage on the property before it
A fortuitous event should occur independent of the
was sold to her. XYZ Bank was also the purchaser
will of the debtor or without his participation or
in the foreclosure sale of the property. At that time,
aggravation (Paras, Civil Code Annotated, vol. IV,
the property was still unregistered but XYZ Bank
2000 ed., p 159). As mentioned in the facts, labor
registered the Sheriff's Deed of Conveyance in the
unrest of the employees was caused by AB
day book of the Register of Deeds under Act. 3344
Corp.'s failure to pay its employees on time.
and obtained a tax declaration in its name.
b. Can XY Corp. unilaterrally and
a. Was Dehlma a purchaser in good faith?
immediately cancel the contract? (2%)
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, XY Corp. cannot unilaterally and immediately
Yes, Dehlma is a purchaser in good faith. In the
cancel the contract. In the absence of any
present case, before Dehlma bought the property,
stipulation for automatic rescission, rescission
she went to the Register of Deeds to verify Juliet's
must be judicial (Art. 1191, Civil Code).
title. When she discovered that the property was
mortgaged to Elaine, she gave an advance
c. Must AB Corp. return the 50% payment so that Juliet could release the
downpayment? (2%) mortgage. It was only after the mortgage was
released and free from the claims of other persons
SUGGESTED ANSWER: that Dehlma bought the property. Thus, Dehlma is
a purchaser in good faith (Mathay v. CA, G.R. No.
AB Corp. need not return the 50% down payment 115788, 17 Sept, 1998).
because 45% of the work was already completed,
otherwise, XY Corp. would be unjustly enriching b. Who as between Dehlma and XYZ Bank
itself at the expense of AB Corp. has a better right to the house and lot?
(2%)
XIX
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Juliet offered to sell her house and lot, together
with all the furniture and appliances therein to Between Dehlma and XYZ Bank, Dehlma has a
Dehlma. Before agreeing to purchase the better right to the house and lot. After the release
property, Dehlma went to the Register of Deeds to of the mortgage, the Deed of Absolute Sale was
verify Juliet's title. She discovered that while the registered and a new title was issued in Dehlma's
property was registered in Juliet's name under the name. Act 3344 is applicable exclusively to
Land Registration Act, as amended by the instruments resulting from agreement of parties
Property Registration Decree, it property, Dehlma thereto and does not apply to deeds of a sheriff
told Juliet to redeem the property from Elaine, and conveying to a purchaser unregistered lands sold
to him under execution (Williams v. Suñer, 49 Phil.
,534).

c. Who owns the movables inside the

house? (2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Dehlma owns the movables because when she
acquired the house and lot from Juliet, all the
furniture and appliances therein were included in
the sale. As owner of the real property, Dehlma
also owns the movables found therein (Art. 542,
Civil Code).